The background description includes information that may be useful in understanding the present invention. It is not an admission that any of the information provided herein is prior art or relevant to the presently claimed invention, or that any publication specifically or implicitly referenced is prior art.
Lead acid batteries (LABs) are the single largest class of batteries used today. They are essential for applications ranging from starting automobile engines, providing emergency back-up power for data centers, and powering industrial and recreational vehicles such as fork lift trucks and golf carts. Unlike any other battery type, LABs are almost 100% recycled and this feature puts lead as the single most recycled commodity. While LAB production is increasing at an average rate of about 5% per year globally, production of new lead from ore is becoming increasingly difficult as lead rich ore deposits as depleted. Not surprisingly, new and more efficient methods for lead recycling are urgently needed.
Unfortunately, all or almost all of the current lead recycling from LABs is still based on lead smelting technology, originally developed over 2000 years ago to produce lead from ore bodies. Lead smelting is a pyro-metallurgical process in which lead, lead oxides, and other lead compounds are heated to about 1600° F. and then mixed with various reducing agents to remove oxides, sulfates, and other non-lead materials. Prior Art FIG. 1 depicts a typical smelting operation starting with ground up LAB materials.
Unfortunately, lead smelting is a highly polluting process, generating significant airborne waste (e.g., lead dust, CO2, arsenic, SO2), solid waste (lead containing slag), and liquid waste (e.g., sulfuric acid, arsenic salts), and pollution issues have forced the closure of many smelters in the US and other Western countries. Migration and expansion of smelters in less regulated countries has resulted in large scale pollution and high levels of human lead contamination.
To complicate matters, obtaining permits for lead smelters has become increasingly difficult, and smelting plants are generally expensive to build and operate. Consequently, profitable operation of smelters is a function of scale. As such, there is a drive towards larger and more centralized smelters, which is at odds with the logistics of the LAB industry that favors distributed recycling and production located close to concentrations of LAB use. As a result, only the largest LAB producing companies have been able to justify and operate smelters while other companies rely on secondary lead producers to recycle their batteries and supply them with lead. This can make it difficult for LAB producers to meet increasingly stringent requirements for “cradle to grave” control of their products, such as the international standard ISO 14000.
On a more technical level, it should be appreciated that lead smelting was developed to produce lead from lead ore (primarily Galena or lead sulfide). However, the chemistry of recycled lead acid batteries is vastly different to the chemistry of lead smelting of ores. As such lead smelting is a fundamentally inefficient process for lead recycling.
Various efforts have been made to move away from smelting operations and to use more environmentally friendly solutions. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,927,510 teaches recovering in pure metal form substantially all lead from battery sludge after a desulfurization process. All publications identified herein are incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each individual publication or patent application were specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference. Where a definition or use of a term in an incorporated reference is inconsistent or contrary to the definition of that term provided herein, the definition of that term provided herein applies and the definition of that term in the reference does not apply. Unfortunately, the '510 patent still requires use of a fluorine containing electrolyte, which is equally problematic.
To overcome some of the difficulties associated with fluorine containing electrolyte, desulfurized lead active materials have been dissolved in methane sulfonic acid as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,262,020 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,520,794. However, as lead sulfate is rather poorly soluble in methane sulfonic acid, upstream pre-desulfurization is still necessary and residual insoluble materials typically reduced the overall yield to an economically unattractive process. To improve at least some of the aspects associated with lead sulfate, oxygen and/or ferric methane sulfonate can be added as described in WO 2014/076544, or mixed oxides can be produced as taught in WO 2014/076547. However, despite the improved yield, several disadvantages nevertheless remain. Among other things, solvent reuse in these processes often requires additional effort, and residual sulfates are still lost as waste product. Moreover, during process upset conditions or power outage (which is not uncommon in electrolytic lead recovery), the plated metallic lead will dissolve back into the electrolyte in conventional electrolytic recovery operations, unless the cathode was removed and the lead peeled off, rendering batch operation at best problematic.
Thus, even though numerous methods for lead recycling are known in the art, all or almost all of them, suffer from one or more disadvantages. Therefore, there is still a need for improved devices and method for smelterless recycling of lead acid batteries, especially in a continuous manner.